- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Monday, September 25, 2006

Talking of lynch mobs - 100 Years ago


There is a lot of debate in the below blog I posted about some local residents who set upon three suspected teenagers by shooting at them, ramming them of the roads, and then rolling boulders upon the teenagers when they were cornered. I’m fascinated to see so many voices trying to justify this action, and then this story caught my eye from the ‘100 years ago’ section of the Herald – looks like some of our right wing friends haven’t evolved much in 100 years.

Awful racial massacre in America

Dreadful anti-negro riots took place in the city of Atlanta, Georgia, on Saturday. The newspapers of that day announced that five woman had been assaulted by negroes.

This statement enraged the whites, and they turned out and collected in angry mobs in all parts of the city.

A horrible massacre then began. Every negro found in the streets was attacked with pistols, knives, sticks and stones.

The police were powerless to stop the disorder. The Mayor drove to stop the disorder. The Mayor drove about the city appealing to the people to desist, but was disregarded. The fire brigade was turned out, and water was poured by them upon the rioters, but this measure also had no effect on the people.

The tramcars were searched for negro passengers, and when found they were dragged out and killed or severely beaten.

It was no protection to a negro that he was escorting a negress.

Finally the militia were called out, and they managed to restore order in the city, but the emeute was continued in the suburbs. It is feared that 30 innocent negroes have been murdered.

35 Comments:

At 25/9/06 10:16 am, Anonymous Tim S said...

Careful who you label "rightwing" here Bomber. 100 years ago the "Deep South" of the USA was the backbone of the Democratic Party, not of the Republicans.

Its probably also worth noting that the most senior Democratic Party Senator, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, is a former Grand Kleagle of the Ku Klux Klan who vowed never to fight ""with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds."

 
At 25/9/06 10:19 am, Blogger bomber said...

..
Tim s - I'm labelling the current group of right wingers - there's no denying that Democrats were the problem back then - but I'm looking at all those (your voice included Tim S) who were defending this mob violence in the post below

 
At 25/9/06 10:20 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Also note that this historical lynch mob was formed by ignorant and easily led city folk. Country folk would never try to lynch innocents.

 
At 25/9/06 10:27 am, Anonymous Tim S said...

True I support the actions of those people in the thread below. However I would argue strongly that there is a difference between those seeking to defend their property rights in the absence of any immediate protection from police, and the "lynch mobs" of the American South who targetted people solely on the basis of race.

 
At 25/9/06 11:06 am, Blogger bomber said...

..
Well I'm glad you can rationalise that in your own mind TimS - my point is that this lynch mob mentality is not that different from what we saw in NZ recently - the same hatred of the other drove the Americans 100 years ago, and that drove the locals today. The Americans thought they were justified as well Tim, these negros had touched 'white property' - they were accussed of 'assulting woman' - property rights uber alles? Doesn't sound too different to me Tim

 
At 25/9/06 11:39 am, Anonymous Tim S said...

Oh please, the "lynch mob mentality" of the deep south was a product of racism and prejudice which was in turn manifested in everyday life in that area, from the effective disenfranchisement of black people to the various other segregationist policies codified within the "Jim Crowe Laws".

Lynchings were essentially attacks made in the absence of any provocation, other than perceptions based on race. The so called "lynch mob mentality" of that situation in the Wairarapa is one which has been entirely provoked, by the commission of real crimes and the absence of any effective protection from legal authorites. It has not been based upon some spurious perception as were the lynchings of the old South

 
At 25/9/06 12:07 pm, Blogger bomber said...

...
Tim, could you just show me the Court decision that these 3 teenagers were guilty of theft? Like those Negros who touched white property in the form of woman, their guilt hasn't actually been decided by anyone othyer than the mob has it Tim S?

 
At 25/9/06 12:22 pm, Anonymous Tim S said...

No they haven't been convicted. And I'll answer your question with another question Bomber, are you saying that rural people, with no recourse to immediate police protection of their persons and property, guys like Paul McIntyre who have often been the victims of repeated thefts and threats, should just have to sit there and take whatever would otherwise be coming to them?

 
At 25/9/06 12:35 pm, Blogger bomber said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 25/9/06 12:36 pm, Blogger bomber said...

...
Nice side step from the wider issues of mob justice Tim S – what do rural folk do when confronted by three teenage boys who are suspected of committing a crime - well legally you are able to make a citzens arrest and you can use appropriate force during that arrest. Here’s what you are not allowed to do..
a) Shoot at people when there is no direct threat to you or others lives.
b) Ram cars off the road
c) When finally cornered, roll boulders onto trapped teenagers.

I thought that would have been obvious Tim S.

 
At 25/9/06 12:43 pm, Anonymous Tim S said...

What would you deem appropriate force to be, when said suspects are attempting to flee by car, Bomber? Perhaps stand in front of their car? Allegedly the shot was fred at the rear tyre of the car also...

 
At 25/9/06 12:54 pm, Blogger bomber said...

..
Tim S- the cops don't even have these kinds of power - they can't simply open fire on people who are fleeing, they must seek permission before trying to drive a car off the road (and the police driver must be trained before attempting such a maneuver) and NO WHERE do I see the power to roll boulders on top of teenagers when they are trapped. Could you point out the areas within our law that allow the Police to have such powers let alone civilians using that type of power on one another.

But these are points that you can't really defend Tim S, which leads me back to my wider point of this lynch mob mentality. Just as we saw 100 years ago in America, hatred of the other drives this type of mob justice - and what it shows is how little we have actually come in terms of living with one another.

Like I said, some of the people on this site sound like they wouldn't actually stop kicking once the person was on the ground. Trying to justify that staggers me.

 
At 25/9/06 1:29 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whilst I do not condone vigilanty-justice, I do agree with the right of one to defend themselves and their property. I'd dear say this will be yet another trial by jury where the defendant will be found aquitted like all the previous cases in New Zealand. People have the right to defend themselves and their property in New Zealand. If somebody confronted me with a gun,Weather it be loaded or not, I deem it to be real and fully loaded. I would use all my power and wit to be certain that It's not me in the gutter with a hole in my head. And I would defend the case vigorousley until the climax.

 
At 25/9/06 1:52 pm, Blogger bomber said...

..
Anon - we all agree you have the right to defend yourself and your property - but that isn't what happened here - 3 teenagers were fleeing - there was no 'ongoing threat' to life or property - they were shot at, rammed off the road and ad boulders pushed down upon them - that isn''t defending your property and lives - that is lynch mob justice

 
At 25/9/06 2:17 pm, Anonymous Sam said...

Maybe it was the warrior gene that drove them to it?

 
At 25/9/06 2:25 pm, Anonymous Tim S said...

surely the threat to property, was that escape would have meant the loss of said property?

Statute law allows the use of reasonable force, there has yet to be any evidence that shots were fired with the intention of killing anyone (Another point which distinguishes a lynching) but rather at the rear tyre of the car. with the intent of immobilising it. In terms of common law if I were to be defending the local residents I would certainly look to the precedent set in the Paul McIntyre case...similar facts, alleged offenders fleeing, firearm used, offender shot in back. Jury found McIntyre not guilty. Law appears to consider this reasonable force.

Having said that, perhaps the boulders might be an overkill, but may have to let the jury, if any decide on that.

 
At 25/9/06 3:33 pm, Blogger bomber said...

...
I don't know how much weight you can give the Paul McIntyre case as they seem different - with Paul there is still the sense that something ongoing was happening (he shot the guy on his property) - you don't have the right to chase someone all over town with that level of force and your defense of shooting at someone but not having the intent of hurting them just doesn't work.

I love your 'maybe pushing boulders onto them was overkill' that's priceless

 
At 25/9/06 3:34 pm, Anonymous deano said...

What does dragging up this old article from the Herald prove? The two incidents are totally different. In the US issue, no doubt defending 'law and order' was just a pretext for racially motivated attacks. In the NZ example, we had some locals defending their property, probably overstepping the mark, but the motivation was totally different. And chasing three boys and rolling rocks onto them is quite different in degree from attacking people with guns and knives.

 
At 25/9/06 4:10 pm, Blogger bomber said...

...
Don't be a boulder roller deano, I'm comparing lynch mobs with lynch mobs

 
At 25/9/06 4:15 pm, Anonymous Sam Eagle Chest said...

Would it have been better if they had dropped the boulder off a bridge?

 
At 25/9/06 4:19 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

sam,teens don't have warrior genes. they have idiocy genes and hormones.
the slightly red neck view expressed by some could verify that particular ism in the minds of some others. it's good that y'all are talking and not fighting but in no situation that i am aware of, has the use of vigilanty behaviour been any advantage to the abused or the abuser. it is easy to see in naenae where the black power and the mongrel mob are currently proving my point of view to be reasonably valid.

 
At 25/9/06 4:20 pm, Anonymous Tim S said...

Sam Eagle Chest actually raises a valid point, some people go out of their way to make excuses for criminals who do kill and injure people, such as Ngati Rewiti, yet whenever the police or anyone else seek to protect themselves against such criminals, they are condemned by the same people. Surely values are skewed?

 
At 25/9/06 4:21 pm, Blogger bomber said...

...
Sam we both know that if the locals had dropped boulders off a bridge killing a white guy there would be all hell to pay - middle NZ would be baying for blood, just like when it happened in Auckland - however it was just three stupid kids, so shooting at them, driving them off the road and rolling boulders onto them is actually a form of tough love, and any pinko who suggests otherwise is a faggot

 
At 25/9/06 4:26 pm, Anonymous Tim S said...

Shane, what about the deterrent effect? If such behaviour were to actively discourage future home invasions/thefts etc surely that is of benefit to society?

Of course this has to be tempered with a degree of reason. One does not want their to be urban warfare between organisations such as gangs. Arguably the current legal system with its codification of "reasonable force" achieves this.

 
At 25/9/06 4:27 pm, Anonymous deano said...

Well I think a much needed question is this: did the locals actually try to kill or seriously injure the teens, or did they just try to use force apprehend them? Because the latter is surely something we should condone, but the first scenario is going too far.

And I still don't think this example from NZ is an example of 'lynch mob' so I struggle to see the relevance of the old US story

 
At 25/9/06 4:38 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

i am not convinced that a deterrent effect works. well not that i can or have ever observed. we have to go earlier than an ambulance at the bottom of a cliff can deal with. get em while they're young. produce the people we would be proud to have in our society. put the work into children. education is probably the answer to most things that go wrong. not this "pc" rubiish we currently have in schools. a well balanced education provided by men and women. this current female orientated education system and female oriented society does not have balance. no balance. it don't work!

 
At 25/9/06 4:42 pm, Blogger bomber said...

...
Deano - we were discussing tyhe below post on the local lynch mob and I compared it to one in America 100 years ago - I think the confusion you're creating is that the locals didn't techically string any of the teenagers up by their necks thus aren't a lynch mob - my point is that the very same self rationalising mob justice mete out to negros in America 100 years ago is the same self rationalising mob justice that a bunch of locals attempted to mete out to these kids. I've watched many bloggers here voice angry thoughts at those who have done wrong, and I wanted to see where that behaviour would start to be rejected by some of the voices on this site. Many rejected mob justice out right, but then again some tried to defend it.

 
At 25/9/06 4:47 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

there is no reason or defence for mob justice.

 
At 25/9/06 5:20 pm, Anonymous deano said...

But did they try to kill the teens? Because if someone tried to steal from me, I would have no problem chasing them, and attempting to hold them until police arrived. If that is mob justice, then I am for mob justice. Killing people- that's not on of course.

 
At 25/9/06 10:32 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

two good results here:
1)the little bastards will hopefully have got the fright of their lives and will think twice before doing crimes again
2)they will be prosecuted.

 
At 26/9/06 9:34 am, Anonymous Dmitri said...

Good call anon :)

 
At 26/9/06 1:02 pm, Blogger bomber said...

..
Deano - if someone tried to steal from me I would have done the same fucking thing - HAVE DONE the same fucking thing - but this went well beyond a citizens arrest, this was a lynch mob who shot at the car,l rammed it off the road and then pushed boulders onto the teenagers - not even cops have the power to do that.

I made the claim that many of you here seem to be the kind of people who wouldn't stop kicking once someone fell over - and I think many of your statements proove that suspicion to be true. No wonder so many of you post anonymously - I go back to that experience I had as a 17 year old when my family had to run out onto the street after 30 partygoers had cornered a kid for stealing their petrol and were beating him to a bloody pulp - I've seen what lynch mobs are like and the ugly hatred they power themselves up with as a group - just know I'm always going to be the guy who steps in between you and the guy you've already beaten up to say enough (this website is fast resembling the Lord of the Flies sometimes)

 
At 26/9/06 1:57 pm, Blogger ¤°Z°¤-Luke-¤°Z°¤° said...

people get all fired up bomber, dont you just love it!

and to be cheeky check: http://www.myspace.com/channelzwestcoast/

would love your support:)

 
At 1/10/06 5:04 pm, Blogger Oswald Bastable said...

Out where this happened there are no police. The nearest would be about an hour away, driving flat out.

Hell, they could have taken those crapheads out to sea and deep-sixed them in a crayfish pot. Nobody would have been the wiser...

 
At 5/10/06 11:51 am, Blogger bomber said...

...
And that's rural justice for you folks, I can hear the banjos twanging from here

 

Post a Comment

<< Home